I try to make it a rule not to watch the news much, except for every once in a while keep up with the geopolitical goings on in the world, and even more important, i really hate getting into political debates in forums, chat, etc, because i tend to be apolitical (part of my own personal philosophy that it doesnt really matter in the grand scheme of things, just live your life let me live mine and we are all good) Laissez-faire in a way i guess.

But i am so sick of people in my ountry either falling on one side or the other of this played out debate over politics. Increasingly more and more people are realizing that it doesnt really matter and just go on with life. However the older generation is still stuck in this rut of hero worship, expecting some official to save them from the evils of the world. That is why people voted trump in, or voted against him, after all. As we can see that really didnt make a difference because all his promises to fix this or change that just ended up with more of the same. Politicians to me are like gingerbread men, maybe decorated slightly differently, but basically the same cutout. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss, just has a different label.

The latest fairy tale that is trending with trumpites, is this whole Q-anon BS. The slogan "trust in the plan" is really grating on my nerves. It is vapor at best and an outright lie at worst. when are people going to realize that playing this political game is futile and just live their lives? why are the older generation so stuck on chasing the dreams that are fed to them, all the while ignoring the reality they are thrust into every day? I guess some would rather believe in fairy tales and stick to the religion of government being a savior, than face the reality that they are really on their own and can only save themselves in smaller ways. Activism only makes a difference on a personal level, person to person, sharing ideas and maybe that is enough to make others rethink the world in general, and their own actions specifically. protesting just ends up being seen as a temper tantrum no matter what the message is. Sure it can be seen as a "show of force" in a way i guess, but what does it really accomplish? Nothing really unless it fits the agenda of some puppet in power who wants to use it to steer the populace.

In truth, we are all beuatiful, independent, have unique talents and quirks, are capable of so much achievement... we just have to realize that potential in our own ways. Sure there are always people capable of bad things, in fact we all are to one degree or another, but what motivates us? Is it some form of selfish enterprise completely? or can we balance that with some form of benevolence?

Do we really need some central authority to tell us what is right or wrong? to rob us of our privacy? of our dignity? of our hard earned wages? or do we actually go on in life 99% of the time just fine without them holding our hand? What does it say about people who suddenly find themselves rudderless because they dont have someone holding their hand constantly?

I think it says they dont want to grow up. Responsibility for yourself is a scary thing to many. So much so, that many would rather tell other people what to do instead of minding their own affairs.

I guess i am just tired of the constant paradox i am surrounded by, where those who cant even manage to not screw up their own lives, want to control others. People sadly do not understand boundaries. They use "we" when it suits them, but violate that idea when it suits them as well.

This is not really a rant, but more a bunch of musings.

No shadowy group of saviors will change anything, no bunch of played out politicians are going to really do anything that doesnt first benefit them, even to the point of disappointing the people that got them where they are.

I guess in short, my philosophy is we only have today, the past is gone, the future is in flux, and we can only truly control ourselves. So live the best today you can and forget about the rest. The only hero is you, and its not about saving the world, it is about saving yourself. If others see the example, and try it themsleves then maybe that is enough to save the world, but no central figure will do it for us, and it will take all of us, or a de facto majority, just living our lives in dignity to actually change anything real at all.

That won't work as long as we share the air we're breathing and water we're drinking.

And I believe we do not need

Quote:

some central authority to tell us what is right or wrong

but a way to make decisions about matters that affect everyone.
The system of government we have today in most modern countries is probably not the best but also not the worst (I am talking about the semi-corrupt Democracy).

That won't work as long as we share the air we're breathing and water we're drinking.

And I believe we do not need

Quote:

some central authority to tell us what is right or wrong

but a way to make decisions about matters that affect everyone.
The system of government we have today in most modern countries is probably not the best but also not the worst (I am talking about the semi-corrupt Democracy).

well, heres the thing, these artificial shortages of air and water are just that, artificial. the same people telling us we need to pay a tax for cleaner air are polluting it, so paying them is just enabling them to continue their abuse. we can refuse to pay them, because their reasons for needing it are always lies, and they always misuse the funding. taxation is thieft. doing 100% of the work and not gaining 100% of the wages for that labor is slavery. do the math. they do no work and add no value to society, and rob us all, and participate in murder daily, yet they are worthy of getting a percentage of our hard earned labor? insanity. the first step is ignoring them and not enabling their abuse by cutting them off from their funding.

same for this artifical water shortage. look up "star water". there is plenty of evidence that tells us that the sun itself replenishes our water by bursts of hydrogen atoms colliding with oxygen in space, and when they enter our atmosphere, we get new water that was not here before. earth is a water magnet in the solar system. so the shortages that were projected in the 70s, dont exist because the data was incorrect. yet these politicians keep pushing these same rehashed false ideas because the school systems keep pumping these old scientific theories down our throats and we buy the nonsense. its as outdated as the warmongering propaganda of john boltons new macarthyism against russia. but back to water, its really simple too. water can be filtered. you dont have to buy it from the store. better yet, living away from the city has its perks, like no utilities (usually) and no water bill. if you so choose. and this can be done with conveniences and modern comforts. sure it costs something, time, work, money. but in the end it pays off in dividends. once the need for paying for water ceases to be an issue, then the shortage of water becomes clearly a tall tale.

the percieved shortages are for reasons beyond our control, the price of water goes up, the visible evidence we assume is related to a real shortage, but it is just because the wasteful corporations are wasting it on things like fracking or hogging it to make a profit off of us. and we keep enabling them in various ways. so if your water reservoirs went down, think abou tit, there is a dam (artificial) they either let it out, or corporations are pumping it out. That lake was not there 200 years ago.

there is a way to make decisions that can benefit everyone, but everyone has to take responsibility for their own actions, because this corrupt democracy is the fruit of people being too lazy to take responsibility for their own decision making. its pretty simple really. the golden rule. however there is a flip side, if someone violates me, i have the right to punish them immediately for it. it is called self defense. it is called the laws of nature. we are the only species that attempts to brainwash ourselves into thinking those rules do not apply to us. if we start living by them and there are real consequences for bad behavior, then things will change. notice i said behavior and not speech. words are just words. people can change their minds and thus their words, but actions matter. bad behavior gone unchecked only leads to more of it. i am not advocating vigilantes, but each person needs to understand their own power, and quit thinking they have none if someone attacks them. that doesnt mean go out and attack someone. but if they violate you, then you have the right to fight back in that moment. its really simple. all people have the right to defend themselves. that doesn't mean make up some propaganda to justify bad behavior by calling it retaliation either. self defense is never offensive. what a philosophy like this will do in the long run is it will collectively be a deterrent from any bad behavior, including abusive regimes. living by the golden rule (except when attacked) re-enforces good behavior as well. so it is a very simple comprehensive philosophy that is for everyone. we just have to be grown up enough to do the right thing. those that are not, wont make the cut. literally. thats how it is in nature, why do we think we are above it? because of an artificial bubble we live in called society. or a false definition of civilization. a false understanding of what is lawful and what is legal. crime can be legal if it is put in writing by lawyers. laws are absolutes. most of what we are told is law these days are not laws they are statutes, codes and legalized crime. they cant be law because they are not lawful. laws all come from the golden rule and basic rights. ie, the non-agression principle, and the right to self defense. sounds contradictory but it is not i assure you. the same mechanics work in many video games. see what happens when you are minding your own business and get attacked. would you fight back in a video game? what happens if you are minding your own business and dont get attacked? do you attack anyway? or do you just keep going on and let them be? try it out some time just as an experiment.

the thing about the laws of nature are, they dont care if you dont believe in them, they still apply. and if you try to defy them or are ignorant of them, it doesnt mean you are going to be ok, there are consequences. im not talking about the "law of the jungle" which assumes there are predators and prey (thats just a crappy philosophy to live by), but things like gravity. walk off a cliff and it will kill you. poke a tiger and it will maul you to death. nature doesnt care if you dont believe or dont know the consequences, they still apply. so in that same vein, what should be is that if on person were to mess with someone for no reason then the victim should fight back, that is acceptable. its about empowering the individual, and not thinking there needs to be a consensus on every little thing. that leads to slavery and abuse every time. the only consenseus needed is agreeing on the golden rule and the right to defend yourself. bad behavior will come out in the wash.

I believe in the necessity, in an increasingly overcrowded and ill-divided world, of community and society. Of co-operation. Democracy, with all its faults, is still the best way we have of achieving active co-operation on a broad scale.

During the Cold War, when the democratic West faced off against the dictatorial Soviet bloc, capitalists clustered in fear around the democracies, because they were terrified of Bolshevik-style totalitarian communism. The Western rich - individuals and corporations - more-or-less willingly paid high taxes and allowed the democracies to build gradually fairer, better societies, certainly when compared to those which had preceded the Second World War. The European empires were dismantled, without too much fuss (although the words *INSERT MASSIVE CAVEATS HERE* really need to appear at this point, and the West's readiness to undermine nascent developing-world democracies and replace them with brutal fascist dictatorships, in the Middle East and South and Central America, especially, should not be overlooked). But, in general, capitalists lined up with the democracies, paid their taxes, and cowered from the Soviet threat.

Then the Cold War ended. The USSR disbanded. Suddenly, many capitalists found that they didn't really want to pay the sorts of high taxes required by a stable, functioning democracy. Democracies are expensive: providing equality of opportunity to all costs money. So the previous high levels of taxation on the super-rich, and on corporations, were whittled away; we began to see the rise of today's 0.1%. The banks chafed at the restrictions placed upon them following the Wall Street Crash: they wanted to "cut red tape". And lo, regulations were eased, restrictions were lifted - and the stock market began to make the rich much, much richer. Then it imploded, and the populations of nations were required to bail out the casinos. And the rich got richer still.

Capitalists discovered that dictatorships - even ostensibly communist dictatorships, like China - were fine places to make money. In fact, rather better places to make money than the democracies, with their tedious employment laws, environmental regulations, and the like. If you produce a lot of pollutants in the West, you have to pay lots of money to clear it up and to dispose of it safely; in a dictatorship, you just need to bribe a few party officials or dictator's family members, and your problems will disappear. Labour trouble? Nothing a few bought policemen can't fix!

So now, the Western democracies find themselves under threat. Capital and Big Business finds democracy inconvenient. Sure, the democracies are useful as a market, but their tendency to put their citizens' interests before those of the ultra-rich is … annoying. Democratic political institutions are therefore undermined; corporate interests are promoted; the idea of taxation as the price of civilisation is pooh-poohed; fanciful ideas of "trickle-down" economics are noised about. (We've had decades of enriching the rich, and it can be seen quite clearly that this just enriches the rich still further. This really shouldn't be a surprise to anybody: really, did anybody actually believe the idea that the best way to spread the wealth more evenly through society was to give it all to the already monstrously wealthy, so they could buy up all the unsold parts of the common weal and charge us rent to use it?) Many capitalists rather fancy the idea of some sort of imagined neo-feudalism, with societies run by merchant princes: after all, great wealth is only achieved by genius (*INSERT MASSIVE CAVEATS HERE* - it's mostly down to luck, and a little bit of criminality doesn't hurt), and therefore the vast minds of our 0.01% should clearly be the ones to get everybody ticking along. Let Google run the schools, and Amazon run the hospitals, and all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well.

As a species, we face enormous environmental catastrophes in this century. The seas are rising. Deserts are spreading. Ecosystems are teetering on the brink of collapse. These problems are beyond the hope of any individual to mitigate, or avoid the consequences thereof. Co-operation - national and trans-national - is our best hope of getting through the next hundred years with the bulk of our civilisation intact. In my opinion, we face a choice between socialism or extinction. To go it alone seems perilous, and short-sighted; but if humanity goes down that route, the best advice I can think of is a line from John Wyndham's The Kraken Wakes: "Find a nice, self-sufficient hilltop, and fortify it." Insert massive caveats here.

I was typing a huge reply, and then for some reason, it all disappeared (ahh the dreaded touchpad bug) so i have to start all over again.

Anyway...... people often misattribute this quote, but it was not started by albert einstein, it is actually straight out of the text of Alcoholics anonymous, and i really dont know if anyone can be credited for it, but insanity, yes, insanity. Repeating the same thing over and over again, yet expecting different results. Now it is no wonder they would try to attribute it to a scientist, because it does allude to scientific principle. In a laboroatory, you have control groups, and you have treatment groups. So if you repeat the experiment, you would not or should not expect the control group to exhibit the symptoms or results that the treatment group is exhibiting. However this is exactly how politicians behave, and the people who place their trust in them. They keep trying the same thing over and over again, and expect it to be different than what has already been documented time and time again.

Here are some things we know for sure. Democracy always ends up becoming corrupt. Socialism always ends up becoming corrupt. They all eventually deteriorate into more and more consolidation of power, and more and more abuse. They only get knocked back into a more bearable state when and if the populace ousts them by force of arms, and that is what history tells us, however it is always short lived. The same people that hated the abuse they were subject to, turn right around and institue another system of abuse almost immediately. George washington supposedly fought a war on taxation, yet later, he was marching on farmers who were protesting the wiskey tax and forced them to give up the fruits of hard labor and ingenuity to pay a war debt. The same kind of war debt the colonies were not happy with king george for smacking them with. Washington was no hero, just another common thug and opportunist who rode on the good intentions of others and ended up selling americans back into debt slavery. So yes, the Assasins creed version of him was actually fairly accurate.

SO in light of that, the only real revolution that will last, is the revolution of the mind. One that empowers the individual so the people who assume authority are eventually irrelevant. It means growing up, and not just assuming that someone else will take care of us. It means thinking differently, living differently, smarter, being a real world citizen without the need for babysitting. It means it cant be by force of arms, it has to be by force of wills, and ignoring rather than clashing. it has to be by education and through that education,a de facto force of numbers, instead of by willful ignorance trodding along with an ignorant mob. It means not taking anything for granted.

Noboy said that anyone could change anything on their own, that is folly, but we can change things by way of contagion. Contagious behavior can produce large ripples in the world. That goes for positive as well as negative. But the two have got to be in balance and they have to be appropriate where needed. Placing all the focus on one or the other does no good, just like placing all the power at the top does no good.

Often we see the pyramid used to represent things like the food groups, government, or multi level marketing, but in reality the model is upside down (the way it is put into practice that is), and since it is built upside down, it will always be top heavy and always fall over.

The problem with the model is it is part of the solution, not all. A true pyramid has a strong base, that supports the weaker top. But lets think about it differently for a minute. Add another pyramid, and we have a tetrahedron. This makes the core strong and the extremities focused. But that is not all, what is missing is the forces of movement. Add that (in this case we will call it action) and now we have stability, and the ability to create exponential energy. To ebb and flow, to right itself, and to wax and wane without artificial forces swinging the pendulum. In fact most of the mathematics of the universe are based on the tetrahedron. Lay lines for instance. The tropics of cancer and capricorn, distances between planets and the golden ratio all have their roots in the tetrahedron. The number of the tetrahedron is 33.3 (sound familiar?)

No i am not advocating everyone become a Scottish rite mason, but there is some hidden knowledge there that applies to life and it warrants a closer look, and perhaps even warrants thinking of the models of self government, and business in the same light.

So the model we have been sold for democracy is the standard pyramid, however that model has been flipped on its head, and the consolidation of power is straining to prop it up with all kinds of nonsense and fool us into thinking we are not seeing this monstrosity getting ready to collapse, they tell us not to trust what we see and in fact tell us what to see, the original model we were taught to believe in. But a real working model is more comprehensive, with movement, and everything participates toward that movement. it is a real organism, not a dead body pretending to be a living organism.

The model we already have in many western nations is going more and more toward a neo-fuedalism. Corporations (latin for dead speak ie corpus oratio) already pay off by lobbying and fines to escape any real consequences for their pollution. The only time EPA regulations are truly enforced is when one mover and shaker wants to close another business down to consolidate more power. define it how you wish, but the model is a mix of socialism, fascism, and feudalism. The terms oligarchy, technocracy, etc, are all thrown around haphazardly, but in the end it is one group controlling everyone else and abusing that power. Democracy is no different. Democracy assumes that the people vote and the majority rules, however, these days voting is a sham, and the .01% prop up whoever they want to in order to further their own agenda. It is a manipulation game. Votes dont count. Lobbying and the consoldiation of wealth does. Voting is nothing more than throwing a dog biscuit to a starving bear. A consolation prize to the suckers born every day. It is the appearance of participation, yet the absence of real responsibility. Choosing the lesser of two evils is never a real choice, that is the illusion of choice. Its the same as wanting an organic burger, but all we have is Mcdonalds or Burger king. Many would capitulate and eat one of the bad choices instead of starving. Me personally, i would just go out and kill the cow myself.

Real power is the power of how you spend your money. Who do you buy from? what products and services do you feed? If something you buy funds unethical agendas, then you can choose not to fund it by buying another item from someone else. Perhaps the only thing that is not voluntary is taxation, and that is theift. I was not asked if i wanted to, and there is a threat of violence if i refuse to. So if someone in a mask does it to you, it is no different, it is just a matter of who is behind the threat. We can put a hat on it and dress it up, but it is the same no matter who is doing it. We can put a swastika on it, a hammer and sickle, and even an american flag, and it is all the same thing. They have all robbed their own people and fought in expansionist wars against other people who had neither the means or the interest in threatening them, and all are guilty of murdering millions. Yet they all point fingers at each other (typical egotistical bastards).

What we call democracy today, has already evolved into this socio-fascist-neo-feudalism and is deteriorating by the day. Where did this come from? it was inevitable, but you are somewhat right, that big business went to china to pollute, but not just that, they also went to experiment with mixed model communism. And they like the results. We are closer today to a dystopic cyberpunk reality than we think, and it will be the big megacorps running the planet and starting wars openly in the near future. They already have started a covert war.

When people cite the symptoms of a problem, like climate change, i like to point them to a recent article in the NYT where they interviewed a group at MIT conducting geo-engineering experiments. In typical government style, they admit to a problem long after it has been occuring, and long after the population notices, and only do so: once that notice has reached critical mass. Yes they finally admit to spraying the atmosphere with chemicals, but wont admit it has been occuring since 1984, they pretend like it just started. Well, no wonder ecosystems are failing exponentially when they have been polluting the air for decades! Yet they keep trying to fool us into believing we have to pay for the problem they created? Instead of saying "oops. we effed up" they say "well, we have to keep doing this or we will never fix the problem" in effect, pouring gasoline on a raging forest fire. And of course they dress it up with sugar and strawberry toppings so we think it is good for us. "Just walk in the building and get ready for your Zyklon B shower! You want to be clean and healthy right?" Insanity, doing the same thing, expecting different results.

So are these problems really "ours"? or are they the problems created by a bunch of inept or down right premeditatively murderous @sshats? either way it is still our problem, it is just how we choose to deal with it. We can either disrobe and comply, or we can refuse, or put up a stink about it. (not asking permission mind you, that is groveling, but making noise to be heard by other ordinary people, that changes things) In this day and age of instant computing and devices, the means are there, we are already on the cusp of changing the world in spite of the lethargic, overconfident reaction of the people in power. After all i think that is the reason (one of many) why they are pushing so hard to spark WW3 right now, part of it is to make a profit, the other part is to wipe out and wear out people enough so they either comply or forget where they were making progress toward.

So the wars, and theift, and murder are all directed at us. There is no such thing as a benevolent dictator. But we can be benevolent to each other, when it is appropriate. It just takes a hard swallow, and the will to grow the F up.